4

Can one explain why the adjective толстый appears in the name of the famous writer as Толстой, i e with a different ending?

Improve this question
1

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
7

Russian adjectives may end in either -ый/-ий or -ой (the latter is always stressed), so it's OK to have also surnames ending in -ой, such as Мостовой. However, it's unclear why Толстой and several other names (Грязной, Дикой etc.) were formed using -ой instead of the proper ending of a corresponding adjective (толстый, грязный, дикий).

IMO, the most natural explanation could be the influence of some archaic and/or dialect form. At least for the word толстый, such dialect form (толстой) indeed exists. However, it could also happen that the surname was changed deliberately, so it didn't match the adjective "fat" anymore, as @Arioch suggested in the comments. I'm not aware of any authoritative source on that matter.

Improve this answer
4
  • ...or anti-convergence. The surname could be intentionally chosen to be different from the adjective, that can be seen as humiliating one, if not outright insulting.
    – Arioch
    Oct 11, 2017 at 9:34
  • 1
    @Arioch Yes, that's why "it's unclear". As it's often with surnames, you can only be 100% sure "it's related to", but not "how it came to".
    – Matt
    Oct 11, 2017 at 9:40
  • 2
    you just listed one and only one hypothesis (dialectism). I guess one better either mention none, or several. So I enlisted one more. Frankly, the evading ambiguity/insult hypothesis seems more natural to me, than dialectism one
    – Arioch
    Oct 11, 2017 at 9:45
  • Прозвище Толстой (то есть «толстый»), безусловно, указывает на особенности внешнего вида предка, который был дородным, тучным человеком. При этом такое прозвище не считалось уничижительным, так как полнота испокон веков была признаком здоровья, достатка и силы Источник: names.neolove.ru/last_names/18/to/tolstojj.html © NeoLove.ru
    – V.V.
    Oct 15, 2017 at 6:47
4

Yes, "-ой" ending is an archaic form of Russian adjectives, which was largely discontinued by the end of XVIII century.

Хотя в славенском языке мужеские прилагательные имена множественного числа в именительном падеже кончатся на и, однако из того не следует, чтобы в великороссийском языке имели они такое же окончение, ибо славенский язык от великороссийского ничем столько не разнится, как окончениями речений. Например, по-славенски единственные прилагательные мужеские именительные падежи кончатся на ый и ій -- богатый, старій, синій, а по-великороссийски кончатся на ой и ей -- богатой, старшей, синей. По-славенски: сынов_о_мъ, дѣломъ, руцѣ, мене, пихомъ, кланяхуся, по-великороссийски: сыновьямъ, дѣламъ, руки, меня, (мы) пили, (они) кланялись. Таким же образом и множественные прилагательные мужеские в именительном падеже славенские разны от великороссийских.

М. В. Ломоносов

Примечания на предложение о множественном окончении прилагательных имен

1746

Here is another article that touches this subject: О текстологии «Евгения Онегина». Apparently, by 1830s old forms were mostly discontinued, but they still could see occasional use in literature.

Improve this answer
2
  • How is it discontinued? Adjectives like заводской, запасной, ледяной etc. have replaced the Church Slavonic forms much later than XVIII century. Even relatively new adjectives like проводной, расточной etc. use the Russian paradigm.
    – Quassnoi ♦
    Oct 12, 2017 at 10:44
  • All these adjectives are examples of stressed_endings, which are always Ok to be "-ой". "Запасный" is still a legit Russian word.
    – Alexander
    Oct 13, 2017 at 21:45

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge that you have read and understand our privacy policy and code of conduct.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.